Graphics card, as a physics card

2007-05-21 15:54:49

#1

Bell: Frosties > Cornflakes; +362|6555|UK

Did a bit of an experiment today,

Some people (unfortunetly, not me ) really do seem to have more money than they know what to do with. And at the risk of sounding like some kid, I have a friend who is in JUST such a predicimet. He has two, BFG 8800 GTX OC.

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showprodu … subcat=877

I dont know if he got it from them ^^ but suffice to say, he got some sort of to good to be true deal, so why the hell not yea?

Anyways, despite getting blistering performance with any game he runs on it, there is still apparantly, room for improvement. He asked me if there was anyway to get yet more fps out of these cards. We have plenty cooling, so we tried a bit of OC'ing, eventually we got to about the same specs an 8800Ultra will push out, and a few extra fps in game, though with a fair bit more noise and a pretty large temperature increase, id say about a 20% increase idle (the machine crashed at one point due to the soaring temps) so I relaxed them down a bit.

It's running on an eVGA n680i motherboard (http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showprodu … =MB-000-EA), and I noticed this apparant, graphics expansion slot. I know it is not within the SLI config, to my mind it is for physics, but neither of us have a physics card lying around. Do however, have yet another friend with a 8600GTS

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showprodu … subcat=912

So basically, can I use that 8600GTS as a physics card, and if so, would it actually really boost the performance? I really cant tell a fps increase above 120 (atleast with my eyes) and I think its really academic anything above that, but purely as a technical exercise, would it 'improve' the gaming performance of the machine?

On a last note, what kind of PSU consumption are we looking at, I have a hiper 730W, but I doubt that is sufficient for a 8800GTX SLI config and 8600GTS physics am I right?

Plannin on posting 3dmark06 scores shortly (but the CPU isnt exactly high end) with a bit of an attempt at the world record

Help would be great,

Thanks

Martyn

2007-05-21 15:57:00

#2

Havok: Nymphomaniac Treatment Specialist; +302|6681|Florida, United States

I don't think you can transform a graphics card into a physics card...

2007-05-21 15:58:42

#3

Brasso: member; +1,549|6636

Havok wrote:
I don't think you can transform a graphics card into a physics card...

Yeah, you can't transform one. Rofl.

"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"

2007-05-21 16:37:24

#4

GR34: Member; +215|6551|ALBERTA> CANADA

haffeysucks wrote:
Havok wrote:
I don't think you can transform a graphics card into a physics card...
Yeah, you can't transform one. Rofl.

i think on a 680i mobo you can put one card in a physics slot and it will do teh physx. but 2 GTS and an 8600GT are not worth the money get one 8800GTX andthen likean 6800 to do physics or a 7600To do physics dont spend like 1500$ on gfx cards!

Last edited by GR34 (2007-05-21 16:38:51)

2007-05-21 16:44:35

#5

soldevilla13: SuperFly; +21|6728|oregon

GR34 wrote:
haffeysucks wrote:
Havok wrote:
I don't think you can transform a graphics card into a physics card...
Yeah, you can't transform one. Rofl.
i think on a 680i mobo you can put one card in a physics slot and it will do teh physx. but 2 GTS and an 8600GT are not worth the money get one 8800GTX andthen likean 6800 to do physics or a 7600To do physics dont spend like 1500$ on gfx cards!

well, but second of all, its 2 8800 GTX's, and one 8600 GTS, but my mate did something similar, i can't even believe that you can run two 8800GTXs at once, even without the 8600 GTs with that PSU, my friend had over 1000 watt

2007-05-21 16:57:14

#6

SoC./Omega: Member; +122|6547|Omaha, Nebraska!

Physics cards aren't worth the buy yet, it will take years for that technology to advance.

PS: My system will own once I upgrade, cept my CPU (I'll have to do some more work to get the money for what I want).

2007-05-21 17:01:21

#7

Bell: Frosties > Cornflakes; +362|6555|UK

soldevilla13 wrote:
GR34 wrote:
haffeysucks wrote:

Yeah, you can't transform one. Rofl.
i think on a 680i mobo you can put one card in a physics slot and it will do teh physx. but 2 GTS and an 8600GT are not worth the money get one 8800GTX andthen likean 6800 to do physics or a 7600To do physics dont spend like 1500$ on gfx cards!
well, but second of all, its 2 8800 GTX's, and one 8600 GTS, but my mate did something similar, i can't even believe that you can run two 8800GTXs at once, even without the 8600 GTs with that PSU, my friend had over 1000 watt

I am fairly sure there is someone on these forms with a 8800GTX SLI setup (desilboy or something like that), and running on a sub 1000W PSU. I've managed to get a hold of a 850W enermax (original SLI tests done on this) but I think, even with such a high quality PSU, its being pushed way to far, the noise was begining to worry me, so again, we rebooted (and took one of the cards out).

Martyn

2007-05-21 17:12:02

#8

Maj.Do: Member; +85|6758|good old CA

SoC./Omega wrote:
Physics cards aren't worth the buy yet, it will take years for that technology to advance.

PS: My system will own once I upgrade, cept my CPU (I'll have to do some more work to get the money for what I want).

im sure by the time physics card technology advances, the cpus will have like 100 cores. 10 cores for physics : )

2007-05-21 17:13:25

#9

The Stillhouse Kid: Licensed Televulcanologist; +126|6648|Deep In The South Of Texas

GPU based physics processing is something that's in the works, but it will require games that support it, just like with Ageia physics cards.

2007-05-21 17:13:38

#10

_j5689_: Dreads & Bergers; +364|6723|Riva, MD

Maybe it would help with all the physics in Source games.

2007-05-21 17:33:31

#11

Scorpion0x17: can detect anyone's visible post count...; +691|6772|Cambridge (UK)

ROFL I love it when people try to look knowledgable about subjects they know very little about.

OK...

haffeysucks wrote:
Havok wrote:
I don't think you can transform a graphics card into a physics card...
Yeah, you can't transform one. Rofl.

No, you CAN transform a video card into a physics card - with DX10 you can write 'physics shaders'.

SoC./Omega wrote:
Physics cards aren't worth the buy yet,

Whilst I agree with that...

SoC./Omega wrote:
it will take years for that technology to advance.

I don't agree with that.

Give it a year, two at the most, then it will be worth it - the current crop aren't worth it because they're new and largely unsupported, so far...

But, with DX10 and the slowing of visual improvements in graphics quality, physics will become more and more central to developments in gaming.

Maj.Do wrote:
im sure by the time physics card technology advances, the cpus will have like 100 cores. 10 cores for physics : )

see above for why I don't agree with that statement...

However, as I stated in the thread about CPUs with encorporated GPUs, it would make sense for Intel/AMD to start putting dedicated VPU (vector processing unit) cores into their CPUs, and these could be harnesed for either graphics or physics processing.

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:
GPU based physics processing is something that's in the works, but it will require games that support it, just like with Ageia physics cards.

As I said above, it's more than in the works, with DX10 it's here - IIRC, Havok already supports Ageia and DX10-shader hardware based physics processing.

_j5689_ wrote:
Maybe it would help with all the physics in Source games.

I recall reading that they were also investigated both Ageia and DX10-shader based physics processing.

Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2007-05-21 17:34:45)

2007-05-21 17:52:30

#12

The Stillhouse Kid: Licensed Televulcanologist; +126|6648|Deep In The South Of Texas

Scorpion0x17 wrote:
The Stillhouse Kid wrote:
GPU based physics processing is something that's in the works, but it will require games that support it, just like with Ageia physics cards.
As I said above, it's more than in the works, with DX10 it's here - IIRC, Havok already supports Ageia and DX10-shader hardware based physics processing.

I'm talking about(as is the OP) the use of a 3rd GPU dedicated solely to physics. AFAIK there aren't any games out that support this yet, hence "in the works."

2007-05-21 17:57:15

#13

jsnipy: ...; +3,276|6528|...

Havok wrote:
I don't think you can transform a graphics card into a physics card...

You can also turn a video card into a network device

2007-05-21 17:57:29

#14

Scorpion0x17: can detect anyone's visible post count...; +691|6772|Cambridge (UK)

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:
Scorpion0x17 wrote:
The Stillhouse Kid wrote:
GPU based physics processing is something that's in the works, but it will require games that support it, just like with Ageia physics cards.
As I said above, it's more than in the works, with DX10 it's here - IIRC, Havok already supports Ageia and DX10-shader hardware based physics processing.
I'm talking about(as is the OP) the use of a 3rd GPU dedicated solely to physics.

And my point was that the way you get a GPU to run physics is through the DX10 shader model and that this is already supported by the Havok physics engine.

2007-05-21 17:59:10

#15

Scorpion0x17: can detect anyone's visible post count...; +691|6772|Cambridge (UK)

jsnipy wrote:
Havok wrote:
I don't think you can transform a graphics card into a physics card...
You can also turn a video card into a network device

No you can't...

Well, you could...

But not in the same sense as using a graphics card to do physics....

2007-05-21 18:12:16

#16

The Stillhouse Kid: Licensed Televulcanologist; +126|6648|Deep In The South Of Texas

Scorpion0x17 wrote:
The Stillhouse Kid wrote:
Scorpion0x17 wrote:
As I said above, it's more than in the works, with DX10 it's here - IIRC, Havok already supports Ageia and DX10-shader hardware based physics processing.
I'm talking about(as is the OP) the use of a 3rd GPU dedicated solely to physics.
And my point was that the way you get a GPU to run physics is through the DX10 shader model and that this is already supported by the Havok physics engine.

Yes, DX10 and Havok FX support GPU based physics processing, but no current games impliment either method, so the OP is going to see no performance gain by adding a 3rd card to his system.

2007-05-21 18:16:19

#17

Scorpion0x17: can detect anyone's visible post count...; +691|6772|Cambridge (UK)

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:
Scorpion0x17 wrote:
The Stillhouse Kid wrote:

I'm talking about(as is the OP) the use of a 3rd GPU dedicated solely to physics.
And my point was that the way you get a GPU to run physics is through the DX10 shader model and that this is already supported by the Havok physics engine.
Yes, DX10 and Havok FX support GPU based physics processing, but no current games impliment either method, so the OP is going to see no performance gain by adding a 3rd card to his system.

Indeed. I wasn't disagreeing with your statement that games will need to specifically support such features for anyone to see any kind of performance improvement.

2007-05-21 18:20:14

#18

The Stillhouse Kid: Licensed Televulcanologist; +126|6648|Deep In The South Of Texas

K, good enough.

But jeez, 3 video cards? The price, power requirements, heat and fan noise could make a person go crazy, or broke.

2007-05-21 18:22:48

#19

Elamdri: The New Johnnie Cochran; +134|6653|Peoria

SoC./Omega wrote:
Physics cards aren't worth the buy yet, it will take years for that technology to advance.

PS: My system will own once I upgrade, cept my CPU (I'll have to do some more work to get the money for what I want).

QFT, there isn't even a standard design. Some games will use physic cards, and some won't, because they use a different physics card. Wait.

2007-05-21 18:25:48

#20

Scorpion0x17: can detect anyone's visible post count...; +691|6772|Cambridge (UK)

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:
But jeez, 3 video cards? The price, power requirements, heat and fan noise could make a person go crazy, or broke.

Yeah. Both (crazy and broke) probably.

2007-05-21 18:28:02

#21

Scorpion0x17: can detect anyone's visible post count...; +691|6772|Cambridge (UK)

Elamdri wrote:
SoC./Omega wrote:
Physics cards aren't worth the buy yet, it will take years for that technology to advance.

PS: My system will own once I upgrade, cept my CPU (I'll have to do some more work to get the money for what I want).
QFT, there isn't even a standard design. Some games will use physic cards, and some won't, because they use a different physics card. Wait.

That's where middleware comes in - a lot of physics engines are middleware - and like how DirectX supports many graphics cards, middleware physics engines can easily support numerous hardware physics solutions.

2007-05-21 22:55:25

#22

GC_PaNzerFIN: Work and study @ Technical Uni; +528|6420|Finland

you can soon use the 8800GTX SLi to do the physics as well. and 700w PSU can handle 8800GTX SLi, so you propably want to get more powerful IF YOU USE 3 CARDS, LOL. about 1000w-850w. but there is no point in using 3 cards now

3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8

2007-05-22 05:30:55

#23

ReTox: Member; +100|6505|State of RETOXification

The 8800 series has the Quantum Effects engine for Shader physics already. DX10 only I'm sure but there it is.

Last edited by ReTox (2007-05-22 05:33:34)

2007-05-22 07:04:36

#24

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6587|SE London

haffeysucks wrote:
Havok wrote:
I don't think you can transform a graphics card into a physics card...
Yeah, you can't transform one. Rofl.

You can't transform it, but it can do essentially the same job. GPU side physics looks far more likely to succeed than having independent PPUs. The various offerings from ATI and Nvidia have not been properly implemented yet and there is no proper driver support for physics processing on a 3rd Nvidia GPU.

The versatility manufacturers are trying to include in GPUs these days means that they can process almost anything, at varying degrees of efficiency. Look at CUDA (essentially a way of running C code on G80 GPUs to take some load off the CPU) in the G80 GPUs as an example.

The extra slot on 680i boards is for a GPU, not a PPU. I certainly haven't heard of PPUs running over PCI-E, they use regular PCI. The 3rd slot is currently only useful for supporting multiple displays, you can run more screens with 3 GPUs installed. I can't remember if as many as 6 displays are supported, but it's more than you could run otherwise.

2007-05-22 14:24:29

#25

_j5689_: Dreads & Bergers; +364|6723|Riva, MD

Scorpion0x17 wrote:
jsnipy wrote:
Havok wrote:
I don't think you can transform a graphics card into a physics card...
You can also turn a video card into a network device
No you can't...

Well, you could...

But not in the same sense as using a graphics card to do physics....

Better to just get an NIC.

BF2S Forums Graphics card, as a physics card

Havok wrote:

haffeysucks wrote:

Havok wrote:

GR34 wrote:

haffeysucks wrote:

Havok wrote:

soldevilla13 wrote:

GR34 wrote:

haffeysucks wrote:

SoC./Omega wrote:

haffeysucks wrote:

Havok wrote:

SoC./Omega wrote:

SoC./Omega wrote:

Maj.Do wrote:

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:

_j5689_ wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:

Havok wrote:

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

Havok wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:

SoC./Omega wrote:

The Stillhouse Kid wrote:

Elamdri wrote:

SoC./Omega wrote:

haffeysucks wrote:

Havok wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

Havok wrote:

Board footer